The subject matter described herein includes methods, systems, and computer program products for load balanced and symmetric SPF path computations for VoIP traffic engineering. One method includes advertising an output interface cost in a first direction over a first network segment between a source ip device and a destination ip device that is different from an output interface cost in advertised in a second direction over the first network segment. A plurality of available network paths between the source ip device and the destination ip device is identified. A path cost is calculated for each of the available network paths from the source ip device to the destination ip device. Calculating a path cost includes, for paths that include the first network segment, substituting the output interface cost advertised in the first direction with the output interface cost advertised in the second direction. The path costs are ranked based on the calculated costs. A lowest cost path is selected from the ranked paths. Both directions of a media session are assigned to the lowest cost path.
|
1. A system for obtaining a symmetric shortest-path-first (SPF) path selection from a source ip device to a destination ip device through a network, the system comprising:
a source ip device comprising:
(a) a cost table for storing output interface costs for reaching the destination ip device from the source ip device, wherein the cost table is configured to store an output interface cost advertised in a first direction over a first network segment between the source ip device and the destination ip device and an output interface cost advertised in a second direction over the first network segment that is different from the output interface cost advertised in the first direction over the network segment;
(b) a router instance embodied in a memory for identifying a plurality of paths between the source ip device and the destination ip device, for calculating a cost of each path, for ranking the paths based on the calculated costs, and for assigning outbound packets of a media session to a lowest cost path; and
(c) wherein calculating a cost for each path includes, for paths that include the first network segment, substituting the output interface cost advertised in the first direction over the first network segment with the output interface cost advertised in the second direction over the first network segment.
2. The system of
3. The system of
4. The system of
5. The system of
6. The system of
7. The system of
8. The system of
10. The system of
|
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/594,568, filed Nov. 8, 2006 (now U.S. Pat. No. 7,715,403), which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/788,800, filed Apr. 3, 2006, and which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/943,513, filed Sep. 17, 2004 (pending), which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/676,233, filed Oct. 1, 2003 (now U.S. Pat. No. 7,424,025), and which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/526,126 filed Dec. 1, 2003 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/551,814 filed Mar. 10, 2004.
This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/943,275 filed Sep. 17, 2004 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,956,820).
The disclosure of each of the above-referenced documents is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
The subject matter described herein relates to providing voice over IP (VoIP) traffic engineering in a communications network. More particularly, the subject matter described herein relates to methods, systems, and computer program products for load balanced and symmetric path computations for VoIP traffic engineering.
Conventional shortest path first (SPF) routing protocols cause an IP device to select a path across a network to a destination IP device by computing path costs for all available network paths, as determined from link state information received at the IP device on a regular basis from neighboring SPF nodes in the network. Each path cost is calculated by summing the assigned cost for each network segment in the forward direction from the source IP device to the destination IP device. The segment costs are typically assigned by a network administrator to reflect a variety of attributes about each segment including geographic distance, equipment cost, and queue delays. Public networks utilizing SPF routing protocols and methods for defining paths most commonly use the published Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) specification. Networks intended to carry real-time interactive or delay-sensitive traffic such as VoIP or video may use a version of OSPF, called OSPF-TE, whose cost definitions and calculation methods have been modified for such delay-sensitive traffic. Regardless of the SPF protocol utilized, the SPF routing instance in an IP device conventionally determines the preferred path by using the path with the lowest total cost. If more than one path has the same lowest cost, the SPF routing instance may use all paths with the same lowest cost and distribute traffic across them in a load balanced fashion. The SPF routing protocol may modify assigned network segment costs when required by a network administrator, when a network node fails, or when a failure is detected on a network segment. When such a change occurs, routing protocol messages propagate the change to all SPF routing instances using standard protocol messages.
When the costs assigned to different directions of a network path are asymmetric, problems can result for bi-directional, delay-sensitive applications, such as RTP media streams. For example, if costs assigned to different directions of a network path are asymmetric, media gateways at each end of the path may select different paths for different directions of an RTP media stream. If one direction of an RTP media stream from a first media gateway to a second media gateway follows a different path from the reverse direction of the same media stream between the media gateways, the paths may experience different delays, resulting in an overall degradation of media stream quality. In addition, if one path fails while the other path remains active, network resources may be wasted.
Accordingly, in light of these difficulties associated with conventional methods for defining load balanced and symmetric paths through a network, there exists a need for improved methods, systems, and computer program products for load balanced and symmetric path computations for VoIP traffic engineering.
The subject matter described herein includes methods, systems, and computer program products for load balanced and symmetric SPF path computations for VoIP traffic engineering. One method includes advertising an output interface cost in a first direction over a first network segment between a source IP device and a destination IP device that is different from an output interface cost advertised in a second direction over the first network segment. A plurality of available network paths between the source IP device and the destination IP device is identified. A path cost is calculated for each of the available network paths from the source IP device to the destination IP device. Calculating a path cost includes, for paths that include the first network segment, substituting the output interface cost advertised in the first direction with the output interface cost advertised in the second direction. The path costs are ranked based on the calculated costs. A lowest cost path is selected from the ranked paths. Both directions of a media session are assigned to the lowest cost path.
As used herein, the term “IP device” refers to any system that has at least one interface to a network, supports conventional network routing protocols, and accepts traffic in conventional formats. An IP device may be a conventional router or it may be an endpoint, such as a media gateway or a server. The term “source IP device” refers to an IP device serving as the origin of traffic to be carried across the network. The term “destination IP device” refers to an IP device serving as the destination or termination point in the network for the traffic. The term “node” refers to any system in the network that is capable of routing traffic and supporting SPF cost assignments and calculations. The term “segment” refers to a physical connection between adjacent network nodes. The term “path” refers to a defined set of segments and nodes that provide a connection across a network between an IP device sourcing traffic and an IP device sinking or terminating traffic. The term “forward cost” refers to a cost advertised by an IP device. The term “reverse cost” refers to a cost advertised to the IP device.
The subject matter described herein providing load balanced and symmetric path computations for VoIP traffic engineering may be implemented using a computer program product comprising computer executable instructions embodied in a computer-readable medium. Exemplary computer-readable media suitable for implementing the subject matter described herein include chip memory devices, disk memory devices, programmable logic devices, and application specific integrated circuits. In addition, a computer program product that implements the subject matter described herein may be located on a single device or computing platform or may be distributed across multiple devices and/or computing platforms.
Preferred embodiments of the subject matter described herein will now be explained with reference to the accompanying drawings of which:
In view of the problems described above with respect to load balanced and symmetric path computations for VoIP traffic engineering, the subject matter described herein provides a method for load balanced and symmetric SPF path selection from a source IP device to a destination IP device through a network.
Returning to
Returning to
Returning to
Returning to
Returning to
In
MG2 204 may include one IP host function Hd 268, a router instance SPF d 270, and a network interface NI d 272. Media gateway 204 may also include a cost table 274 and a path list 276 that are maintained by router instance 270. VoIP host function Hd 268 may include a transcoder circuit or any similar circuit that serves as a source or termination of application level voice, interactive video, or similar application with requirements on network path delay and routing topologies. Router instance 270 may contain resources to implement the subject matter described herein. NI d 272 may terminate a plurality of network segments including segment 244 to network router RT6 216 and segment 248 to network router RT7 248. MG2 204 may be a conventional IP device or a network aware media gateway.
In the example illustrated in
In
MG2 304 may include one IP host function Hd 376, one SPF routing instance SPF d 378, and at least one network interface NI d 380. VoIP host function Hd 376 may include a transcoder circuit or any similar circuit that serves as a source or termination of application level voice, interactive video, or similar application with requirements on network path delay and routing topologies. Routing instance 378 may contain resources to implement the subject matter described herein. Media gateway 304 may include a cost table 274 and a path list 276 which are maintained by router instance 378. Interface NI d 380 may terminate a plurality of network segments including segment 354 to network router RT6 316 and segment 358 to network router RT7 318.
The topology of the network between media gateways 302 and 304 is the same as that illustrated in
Returning to
In one implementation, router instance SPF 1 256 in media gateway MG1 202 may execute an algorithm based on the subject matter described herein to develop a list of paths for VoIP traffic originating at VoIP host H1 252 and terminating at VoIP host Hd 268 in MG2 204. Router instance 256 may limit the number of intervening routers on each path to be analyzed in order to minimize the computational work required to generate aggregate costs for available network paths. For example, router instance 256 may only consider network path definitions with three or fewer routers between MG1 202 and MG2 204. Using this restriction, SPF 1 256 would identify the following 6 potential network paths from VoIP host H1 252 to VoIP host Hd 264:
a) NI 1 260::RT1 206::RT3 210::RT6 216::NI d 268
b) NI 1 260::RT1 206::RT4 212::RT6 216::NI d 268
c) NI 1 260::RT1 206::RT4 212::RT7 218::NI d 268
d) NI 1 260::RT2 208::RT4 212::RT6 216::NI d 268
e) NI 1 260::RT2 208::RT4 212::RT7 218::NI d 268
f) NI 1 260::RT2 208::RT5 214::RT7 218::NI d 268
The cost models associated with each of these network path definitions may then be defined as follows:
Cost (a)=Cost (220)+Cost (228)+Cost (236)+Cost (246)
Cost (b)=Cost (220)+Cost (230)+Cost (238)+Cost (246)
Cost (c)=Cost (220)+Cost (230)+Cost (240)+Cost (250)
Cost (d)=Cost (222)+Cost (232)+Cost (238)+Cost (246)
Cost (e)=Cost (222)+Cost (232)+Cost (240)+Cost (250)
Cost (f)=Cost (222)+Cost (234)+Cost (244)+Cost (250)
In one example, router instance 256 may calculate the aggregate path cost from H1 in MG1 202 to Hd 268 in MG2 204 for each of the network path topologies defined above. Router instance 256 may substitute costs advertised by next hop routers 206 and 208 for reaching host Hd 268 with asymmetric costs for reaching host H1 252 advertised over the same segments. For example, the cost associated with reaching host H1 252 via interface N1 of 1000 may be substituted with the cost of 1 for reaching host Hd 268 via router 206. If this substitution is performed, the following cost calculations may be performed for reaching host Hd 268 from host H1 252 via interface NI 1 260.
Cost (a): 1+1+1+10=13
Cost (b): 1+10+10+10=31
Cost (c): 1+10+1+10=22
Cost (d): 1000+10+10+10=1030
Cost (e): 1000+10+1+10=1021
Cost (f): 1000+10+10+10=1030
SPF instance SPF d 270 may perform similar cost calculations to reach host H1 252 from host Hd 268 via interface Ni d 272. The following costs calculations may be performed by SPF instance SPF d 270:
Cost (a): 1+1+1+10=13
Cost (b): 1+10+10+10=31
Cost (c): 1+10+1+10=22
Cost (d): 1000+10+10+10=1030
Cost (e): 1000+10+1+10=1021
Cost (f): 1000+10+10+10=1030
As can be see above, the cost calculations for reaching host Hd 268 from host H1 252 are symmetric with respect to those for reaching host H1 252 from host Hd 268. As a result, opposing directions of media sessions will be assigned to the same paths. Similar cost calculations may be performed for media sessions between host H2 254 and host Hd 268. Paths from H2 254 to host Hd 268 may be as follows:
a) NI 2 262::RT1 206::RT3 210::RT6 216::NI d 268
b) NI 2 262::RT1 206::RT4 212::RT6 216::NI d 268
c) NI 2 262::RT1 206::RT4 212::RT7 218::NI d 268
d) NI 2 262::RT2 208::RT4 212::RT6 216::NI d 268
e) NI 2 262::RT2 208::RT4 212::RT7 218::NI d 268
f) NI 2 262::RT2 208::RT5 214::RT7 218::NI d 268
The cost models associated with each of these network path definitions may then be defined as follows:
Cost (a)=Cost (224)+Cost (228)+Cost (236)+Cost (246)
Cost (b)=Cost (224)+Cost (230)+Cost (238)+Cost (246)
Cost (c)=Cost (224)+Cost (230)+Cost (240)+Cost (250)
Cost (d)=Cost (226)+Cost (232)+Cost (238)+Cost (246)
Cost (e)=Cost (226)+Cost (232)+Cost (240)+Cost (250)
Cost (f)=Cost (226)+Cost (234)+Cost (244)+Cost (250)
As with the example above, where costs from a network interface, such as network interface Ni 2 262 are asymmetric with respect to the costs for reaching Hd via next hop router RT2 208, the cost advertised by media gateway 200 for reaching host H2 254 via network interface Ni 2 262 may be substituted with those advertised by next hop router RT2 208 for reaching host Hd 268. Exemplary cost calculations that may be performed are as follows:
Cost (a): 500+1+1+10=1012
Cost (b): 500+10+10+10=1012
Cost (c): 500+10+1+10=1021
Cost (d): 500+10+10+10=530
Cost (e): 500+10+1+10=521
Cost (f): 500+10+10+10=530
The following calculations may be performed by SPF instance SPF d 270 for calculating paths for reaching host H2 254 from host Hd 268:
Cost (a): 1000+1+1+10=1012
Cost (b): 1000+10+10+10=1030
Cost (c): 1000+10+1+10=1021
Cost (d): 1+10+10+10=31
Cost (e): 1+10+1+10=22
Cost (f): 1+10+10+10=31
As can be seen above, the cost for reaching host Hd 268 from host H2 254 are equal to those for reaching host H2 254 from host Hd 268. As a result, symmetric VoIP path assignment can be achieved.
According to one aspect of the subject matter described herein, a system for symmetric network path costs assignment and media path selection is provided. The system may include means for advertising an output interface cost in a first direction over a first network segment between a source IP device and a destination IP device that is different from an output interface cost advertised in a second direction over the first network segment. For example, referring to
The system may further include means for identifying a plurality of available network paths between the source IP device and the destination IP device. For example, referring to
The system may include means for calculating a path cost for each of the available network paths from the source IP device to the destination IP device, wherein, calculating a path cost includes, for paths that include the first network segment, substituting the output interface cost advertised in the first direction with the output interface cost advertised in the second direction. For example, referring to
The system may further include ranking the paths based on the calculated costs. For example, in
The system may further include means for selecting, from the ranked paths, a lowest cost path. For example, referring to
The system may further include means for assigning both directions of a media session to the lowest cost path. For example, referring to
It will be understood that various details of the subject matter described herein may be changed without departing from the scope of the subject matter described herein. Furthermore, the foregoing description is for the purpose of illustration only, and not for the purpose of limitation, as the subject matter described herein is defined by the claims as set forth hereinafter.
Li, San-qi, Shei, Yen, Zhu, Rupert, Lu, David Z., Qian, Edward Y.
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
Patent | Priority | Assignee | Title |
6049524, | Nov 20 1997 | AMAZON COM, INC | Multiplex router device comprising a function for controlling a traffic occurrence at the time of alteration process of a plurality of router calculation units |
6061348, | Dec 22 1995 | Cisco Technology, Inc | Method and apparatus for dynamically allocating bandwidth for a time division multiplexed data bus |
6363065, | Nov 10 1999 | RIBBON COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC | okApparatus for a voice over IP (voIP) telephony gateway and methods for use therein |
6426944, | Dec 30 1998 | AT&T Corp | Method and apparatus for controlling data messages across a fast packet network |
6633563, | Mar 02 1999 | Ericsson AB | Assigning cell data to one of several processors provided in a data switch |
6674744, | Sep 22 1998 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Point-to-point data transport over the internet utilizing label switching without IP headers |
6714535, | Nov 08 1999 | DAVICOM SEMICONDUCTOR, INC | Method and system for unlimited use of telephony services over a data network without incurring long distance calling tolls |
6771673, | Aug 31 2000 | Verizon Patent and Licensing Inc | Methods and apparatus and data structures for providing access to an edge router of a network |
6831895, | May 19 1999 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Methods and devices for relieving congestion in hop-by-hop routed packet networks |
6831898, | Aug 16 2000 | Cisco Technology, Inc | Multiple packet paths to improve reliability in an IP network |
6879667, | May 07 2001 | Genband US LLC; SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | System and method for interfacing telephony voice signals with a broadband access network |
6956820, | Oct 01 2003 | Genband US LLC; SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | Methods, systems, and computer program products for voice over IP (VoIP) traffic engineering and path resilience using network-aware media gateway |
7177943, | Dec 27 2001 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | System and method for processing packets in a multi-processor environment |
7185094, | Mar 30 2001 | nVoq Incorporated | Media session framework using a control module to direct and manage application and service servers |
7212519, | Jul 14 1999 | Ericsson, Inc | Combining narrowband applications with broadband transport |
7394818, | Sep 22 2000 | Qwest Communications International Inc. | Extended multi-line hunt group communication |
7411963, | Jan 19 2005 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method for dissemination of non-routing information using the IS-IS protocol |
7424025, | Oct 01 2003 | Genband US LLC; SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | Methods and systems for per-session dynamic management of media gateway resources |
7460481, | Dec 01 2004 | Cisco Technology, Inc.; Cisco Technology, Inc | Inter-domain TE-LSP with IGP extensions |
7522603, | Mar 14 2006 | Cisco Technology, Inc.; Cisco Technology, Inc | Technique for efficiently routing IP traffic on CE-CE paths across a provider network |
7570594, | Oct 01 2003 | Genband US LLC; SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | Methods, systems, and computer program products for multi-path shortest-path-first computations and distance-based interface selection for VoIP traffic |
7623461, | Feb 09 2005 | Cisco Technology, Inc.; Cisco Technology, Inc | Trigger for packing path computation requests |
7715403, | Oct 01 2003 | Genband US LLC; SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | Methods, systems, and computer program products for load balanced and symmetric path computations for VoIP traffic engineering |
7792991, | Dec 17 2002 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for advertising a link cost in a data communications network |
20010036173, | |||
20020006112, | |||
20020012352, | |||
20020016926, | |||
20020051464, | |||
20020172221, | |||
20020176374, | |||
20020191612, | |||
20030093555, | |||
20030099192, | |||
20030118039, | |||
20030131263, | |||
20030142795, | |||
20030193898, | |||
20040047345, | |||
20040066782, | |||
20050068942, | |||
20050073998, | |||
20050111349, | |||
20060159083, | |||
20070053300, | |||
20070064613, | |||
20070083528, | |||
EP1235409, | |||
GB2363549, | |||
WO143387, | |||
WO2004002173, | |||
WO2004071036, |
Executed on | Assignor | Assignee | Conveyance | Frame | Reel | Doc |
May 06 2010 | Genband US LLC | (assignment on the face of the patent) | / | |||
Jul 29 2011 | GENBEND US LLC A DELAWARE LLC | COMERICA BANK A TEXAS BANKING ASSOCIATION , AS AGENT ATTN: NATIONAL DOCUMENTATION SERVICES | AMENDED AND RESTATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECURITY AGREEMENT | 027315 | /0293 | |
Jul 01 2016 | Genband US LLC | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | CORRECTIVE ASSIGNMENT TO CORRECT PATENT NO 6381239 PREVIOUSLY RECORDED AT REEL: 039269 FRAME: 0234 ASSIGNOR S HEREBY CONFIRMS THE PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT | 041422 | /0080 | |
Jul 01 2016 | COMERICA BANK, AS AGENT | Genband US LLC | RELEASE AND REASSIGNMENT OF PATENTS | 039280 | /0467 | |
Jul 01 2016 | Genband US LLC | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT | 039269 | /0234 | |
Dec 21 2017 | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | Genband US LLC | TERMINATION AND RELEASE OF PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT | 044986 | /0303 | |
Dec 29 2017 | SONUS NETWORKS, INC | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | SECURITY INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 044978 | /0801 | |
Dec 29 2017 | Genband US LLC | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | SECURITY INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 044978 | /0801 | |
Mar 03 2020 | SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | RIBBON COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC F K A GENBAND US LLC AND SONUS NETWORKS, INC | TERMINATION AND RELEASE OF PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT AT R F 044978 0801 | 058949 | /0497 | |
Mar 03 2020 | RIBBON COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC | CITIZENS BANK, N A , AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | SECURITY INTEREST SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 052076 | /0905 | |
Jun 20 2024 | CITIZENS BANK, N A | RIBBON COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC F K A GENBAND US LLC AND SONUS NETWORKS, INC | RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS | 067822 | /0433 | |
Aug 26 2024 | RIBBON COMMUNICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC | HPS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT | SHORT-FORM PATENTS SECURITY AGREEMENT | 068857 | /0290 |
Date | Maintenance Fee Events |
Dec 29 2014 | M1551: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 4th Year, Large Entity. |
Dec 28 2018 | M1552: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 8th Year, Large Entity. |
Dec 28 2022 | M1553: Payment of Maintenance Fee, 12th Year, Large Entity. |
Date | Maintenance Schedule |
Jun 28 2014 | 4 years fee payment window open |
Dec 28 2014 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 28 2015 | patent expiry (for year 4) |
Jun 28 2017 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 4) |
Jun 28 2018 | 8 years fee payment window open |
Dec 28 2018 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 28 2019 | patent expiry (for year 8) |
Jun 28 2021 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 8) |
Jun 28 2022 | 12 years fee payment window open |
Dec 28 2022 | 6 months grace period start (w surcharge) |
Jun 28 2023 | patent expiry (for year 12) |
Jun 28 2025 | 2 years to revive unintentionally abandoned end. (for year 12) |